Dynamic Response of Pedestrian

Bridges/Floor Vibration and Various

Methods of Vibration Remediation

Presentation
Brief overview of structural vibration
Understanding how people perceive and
react to unwanted vibration
General response of pedestrian bridges to
vibration
ib ti
Various design guidelines
Damping
Bridge case study

Chung C. Fu, Ph.D., P.E.

Structural Vibration

Stiffness Force: FS = -kx

Damping Force: FD = -cx
External Force: FE(t)
Inertial Force

Structural Vibration

General equation of motion

mx (t ) + cx (t ) + kx
k (t ) = Fe (t )

Structural Vibration

Structural Vibration
Forced Vibration

Free Vibration

mx (t ) + cx (t ) + kx(t ) = 0
Solution
x(t ) = e

n t

x(0) = 0 x (0) = 0

x + xo nt
x(t ) = xo e nt cos( d t ) + n o
e
sin ( d t ) +
n 1 2

n xo + xo
(
)
(
)
+

x
cos
t
sin

t
o
d
d
n 1 2

n x p (0) + x p (0) nt
t
e
sin ( d t )
x p (t ) x p (0)e n cos( d t )
2
n 1

x + xo
x (t ) = e nt xo cos( d t ) n o
sin
i ( d t )
1 2

n2 =

k
m

c
m

2 n =

mx (t ) + cx (t ) + kx(t ) = Fe (t )
Solution

x + xo nt
x (t ) = xo e nt cos( d t ) n o
e
sin ( d t ) +
1 2

d = n 1 2

n x p (0) + x p (0) nt
t
e
sin ( d t )
x p (t ) x p (0)e n cos( d t ) +
2
1

Structural Vibration

Human Perception

Steady State Forcing Function

Human Response

Fe (t ) = Fo sin ( o t )

Present: Not perceived

Perceived: Does not annoy
Perceived: Annoys and disturbs
Perceived: Severe enough to cause illness

Solution
xss (t ) =

x ss (t ) =

Fo

(1 r )

2 2

Fo o

(1 r )

2 2

k
2r cos(ot ) + 1 r 2 sin (ot )
2
+ (2r )

Peak acceleration limits

Situation

Building in
Strong Wind

Public
Transportation

Building in
Earthquake

Amusement
Park Ride

Peak Acceleration (% g)

0.5 10

51 102

204 458

<458

k
(1 r )2 cos( o t ) + 2r sin ( o t )
2
+ (2r )

Pedestrian Bridge Response

Peak
Acceleration
for Human
C f t for
Comfort
f
Vibrations

Vertical Vibration
Lateral Vibration

Design Guide 11 Fig. 2.1 Recommended peak acceleration for human

comfort for vibrations due to human activities

Pedestrian Bridge Response

Pedestrian Bridge Response

Vertical Vibration (also apply to floor vibration)

F (t ) = P[1 +

Lateral Vibration

cos(2if step t + i )

P = Persons weight
i = Dynamic
D
i coefficient
ffi i t ffor the
th
harmonic force
i = Harmonic multiple (1
(1, 2
2, 3
3))
fstep = Step frequency of activity
t = time
i = Phase angle for the harmonic

Synchronous Lateral Excitation

Design Guidelines
Serviceability (i.e.
(i e functional,
functional usable)
Stiffness
Resonance

Resonance
Frequency matching
Uncomfortable/damaging vibration
Unfavorable perception

AVOID RESONACE!

Design Guidelines
Natural Frequency (Vertical Vibration)
Limiting
Li iti values
l
(B
(Bridge)
id )
AASHTO

f > 3.0
3 0 Hz
f > 2.85ln(180/W)
W > 180e-0.35f
Special cases: f > 5.0 Hz

British Code (1978 BS 5400)/Ontario Bridge Code

(1983)

fo > 5.0 Hz
amax < 0.5(fo)1/2 m/s2
amax = 4
4 2fo2ysK
F = 180sin(2foT) N
vt = 0.9fo m/s (> 2.5 m/s per Ontario Code)

Design Guidelines
Natural Frequency
f =

stiffness
=
mass
2

Ex ) Uniformly loaded simple beam:

Ex.)
f n = 0.18

5wL4
=
384 EI

Bridge Design Guidelines

a max = 4 2 f o2 y s K

British Design Guidelines

Natural Frequency (Vertical Vibration)

a max = 4 f y s K
2

Design Guidelines

2
o

Limiting values
AASHTO
British Code (1978 BS 5400)
AISC/CISC Steel Design Guide Series 11
Po e 0.35 f o
=
g
W

ap

Response to Sinusoidal Force

Resonance response function

< 1.5% (Indoor walkways)

< 5.0% (Outdoor bridges)

Steel Framed Floor System

The combined Beam or jjoist and g
girder p
panel system
y
Spring in parallel (a & b) or in series (c & d)
System
y
frequency
q
y

Simplified design criterion

a/g, a0/g= ratio of the floor

acceleration to the acceleration
of gravity; acceleration limit
fn = natural frequency of floor
structure
Po = constant force equal to 0.29
kN (65 lb.) for floors and 0.41 kN
(92 lb.) for footbridges

Equivalent panel
weight

Design Guidelines

Design Guidelines

Natural Frequency (Lateral Vibration)

Stiffening

Step frequency vertical

1996 British Standard BS 6399

Uneconomical
Unsightly

10% vertical load

Damping

Per ARUP research

Inherent damping < 1%

%
Mechanical damping devices

f > 1.3 Hz

Rule of thumb
Lateral limits vertical limits

Damping

Damping
Viscous Damping

Coulomb Damping

t
x(t ) = x max e
sin ( d t + )

Fd = mx + kx

1 2

F
F

x = xo d cos t + d
k
k

xt = = xo + 2

Fd
k

1
1
ln
2n

1
1
ln
2
2n

Welded steel,
steel prestressed concrete,
concrete well
detailed reinforced concrete.

0 02 < < 0.03

0.02
0 03

Reinforced concrete with considerable

cracking.

0.03 < < 0.05

Damping
Mechanical dampers
Active dampers (not discussed here)

Damping
Mechanical dampers
Passive dampers

Expensive
E
i
Complicated
No proven examples for
f bridges
(prototypes currently being tested for
seismic damping)

Viscous Dampers
Tuned Mass Dampers (TMDs)
Viscoelastic Dampers
Tuned Liquid Dampers (TLDs)

Damping

Viscous Dampers

FD = c( x )

45
40
35
30
Damping Force
e

Viscous Dampers

Damping

Linear

25

Fast Rise
20

Slow Rise

15
10
5
0
0

0.5

1.5
Velocity

2.5

Dampers
Tuned mass damper

s =

Dampers
Viscoelastic Dampers

1 m
2 M

Ex) Consider mass ratio = 0.01

s = 0
0.05
05 (5% damping)

Dampers
Tuned Liquid Dampers

Case Study: Millennium Bridge

Crosses River Thames, London, England
474 main
i span, 266 north
th span, 350
south span

S
Superstructure
t t
supported
t d by
b lateral
l t l
supporting cables (7 sag)
Bridge opened June 2000
2000, closed 2 days
later

Millennium Bridge
Severe lateral resonance was noted
(0.25g)
Predominantly noted during 1st mode of
south span (0.8 Hz) and 1st and 2nd
modes of main span (0
(0.5
5 Hz and 0
0.9
9 Hz)
Occurred only when heavily congested
Phenomenon
Ph
called
ll d S
Synchronous
h
Lateral Excitation

Millennium Bridge
Possible solutions
Stiffen
Stiff the
th bridge
b id
Too costly
Affected aesthetic vision of the bridge

Limit pedestrian traffic

Not feasible

Active damping
Complicated
Costly
Unproven

Passive damping

Millennium Bridge
Passive Dampers
37 viscous dampers installed
19 TMDs installed

Millennium Bridge
Results
Provided 20% critical damping.
Bridge was reopened February
February, 2002
2002.
Extensive research leads to eventual
updating of design code
code.